Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
typodupeerror delete not in

Comments: 243 +-   ISS To Become Second Brightest-Object In the Sky on Monday March 09 2009, @03:15PM

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Monday March 09 2009, @03:15PM
from the bright-future-of-the-iss dept.
space
science
Matt_dk writes "Move over, Morning Star. Once Canadarm2 helps install the fourth and final set of solar array wings to the International Space Station later this month, the Station will surpass Venus as the brightest object in the night sky, second only to the Moon. The Space Shuttle Discovery is set to deliver the power-generating solar panels and Starboard 6 (S6) truss segment to the ISS on the 125th mission in the Shuttle program, known as STS-119/15A (slated for launch on March 11)."
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by lecithin (745575) on Monday March 09 2009, @03:15PM (#27126047)

    Yes, the ISS is bright and will be brighter.

    This still doesn't rival the brightness of an Iridium flare.

    Predictions of the ISS and Iridium flares are provided at http://www.heavens-above.com/ [heavens-above.com]

    Then there have been comets and supernova that have been visible during daylight. Yea, I think the ISS is cool to observe, but don't call it 2nd brightest after the moon.

    • by interkin3tic (1469267) on Monday March 09 2009, @03:17PM (#27126069)

      Plus, you know, THE SUN. (I know the summary was more specific, but the title was not.)

    • by Chris Burke (6130) on Monday March 09 2009, @03:37PM (#27126375) Homepage

      Yes, the ISS is bright and will be brighter.

      This still doesn't rival the brightness of an Iridium flare.

      Then there have been comets and supernova that have been visible during daylight. Yea, I think the ISS is cool to observe, but don't call it 2nd brightest after the moon.

      Okay, but those supernova are long gone so while they were on top back then, they aren't relevant today. You could also make an argument that the flare's apparent brightness only lasts a couple seconds while the ISS is bright for the majority of its traversal. Doesn't change that the flare really is much brighter when it occurs, but on the other hand on a normal night I'm perfectly comfortable saying that Venus is the 2nd brightest object in the sky.

      Either way, this is a dramatic increase in the brightness of ISS. On a clear night far away from cities, ISS is easy to see, but also easy to lose in the sea of stars of similar brightness*. To be sure that you'll find it, you have to know roughly when and where it will appear, and then look for the star that moves. If it becomes brighter than Venus, you won't need a schedule or even a dark sky to be able to easily see when it passes over.

      * Okay WP says that its max magnitude is equal to that of Venus, but I've never seen ISS under those conditions then. If the upgraded ISS will only be brighter than Venus at maximum, then maybe it's not that big a change as I'm thinking.

    • by Maury Markowitz (452832) on Monday March 09 2009, @03:44PM (#27126487) Homepage

      > This still doesn't rival the brightness of an Iridium flare.

      Yes it does. It does already. You're comparing flare mags with standard mags. The ISS _does_ flare, and when it does it is much brighter than Iridium. Sadly, Mike Tyrrell's page is gone, but there was a collection of images there.

      Maury

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 09 2009, @03:16PM (#27126055)

    Move over, Morning Star. Once Canadarm2 helps install the fourth and final set of solar array wings to the International Space Station later this month, the Station will surpass Venus as the brightest object in the night sky, second only to the Moon.

    That's no moon. It's the International Space Station.

  • by Zymergy (803632) * on Monday March 09 2009, @03:19PM (#27126097)
    I keep thinking of the effects of a discarded Coke bottle on those non-technically savvy people in "The Gods Must Be Crazy"...
    Perhaps they will select Three Wise Men to go on a pilgrimage toward the bright new star...
  • by Daimanta (1140543) on Monday March 09 2009, @03:20PM (#27126103) Journal

    I live in a city so the light pollution messes up any chances I have at looking at a starry sky. I have as a child always found it incomprehensible that people said that you couldn't count all the stars because I can surely do it where I live.

  • Darkness (Score:5, Interesting)

    by qoncept (599709) on Monday March 09 2009, @03:21PM (#27126113) Homepage
    My dad grew up in the middle-of-nowhere, Idaho, and says when he was kid they would watch Sputnik fly across the sky. The high elevation and lack of big city lights make the night sky amazing.
  • "I saw two shooting stars last night,
    I wished on them but they were only satellites.
    Is it wrong to wish on space hardware?"
    --Billy Brag "A New England"

  • by petes_PoV (912422) on Monday March 09 2009, @03:24PM (#27126161)
    Some say Venus is visible during the day (tho' I've not seen it myself).

    If the ISS does turn out to be brighter than Venus - which varies in brightness considerably, depending on where in it's orbit it is - relative to earth, then it will be interesting to see if it's visible during daytime passes, too.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      Venus can be (and often is) visible during the day. The Moon also, and I'm sure you've seen that some time.

      The only problem is that ISS isn't stationary, so you have to know where to look and at the right time as well!
  • by Yvan256 (722131) on Monday March 09 2009, @03:30PM (#27126265) Homepage Journal

    Anyone know which country the Canadarm2 is from? /ducks

  • How ironic (Score:5, Interesting)

    by zmooc (33175) <`ten.coomz' `ta' `coomz'> on Monday March 09 2009, @03:43PM (#27126473) Homepage

    Isn't it ironic that the parts of the ISS that are meant to absorb as much sunlight as they can, actually reflect enough of it to make the ISS the seconds brightest object in the sky:P

    • by CopaceticOpus (965603) on Monday March 09 2009, @04:02PM (#27126733)

      Who would've thought, it figures...

    • Re:How ironic (Score:4, Interesting)

      by evanbd (210358) on Monday March 09 2009, @07:35PM (#27128895)
      Solar panels are fairly dark. It's just that the night sky background is *really* dark. For comparison, the Moon has an albedo (fraction of light reflected) of 0.12. That's a fairly dark gray for something in normal realms of experience -- but a bright white against the night sky. Shine enough light on something with a dark background, and it will look bright.
    • It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!)

      Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors .. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it! These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt .45 and a .38 Special! And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.

      Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!

      Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.

    • Re:Moon? (Score:5, Funny)

      by SnarfQuest (469614) on Monday March 09 2009, @03:35PM (#27126337)

      Actually, in order to combat global warming, they intend to turn off the sun.

"There are things that are so serious that you can only joke about them" - Heisenberg